Wanted! Complex Female Adult Character: (was:Re: ESE!McGonagall...

[horridporrid03]

No: HPFGUIDX 164653

> >>Julie:
> >I guess my real disappointment with Canon!McGonagall then is that  
> >she is such a one note character, which seems to be par for the    
> >course with the adult female characters. 
> ><snip 'cause in total agreement>

> >>Jeremiah:
> I'm not going to do the "boys vs. girls" thing, but I want to talk 
> a bit about the ladies you'd mentioned as being one-dimensional,
>
> I don't see Molly Weasley as one-dimensional. Not at all. I see her 
> as extremely complex as a mother-figure.
> <snip>

Betsy Hp:
Is she really complex though?  I mean, Molly is the "harried mom" 
complete with a total inability to get the "real point" (on going 
war, etc.) and a tendency to see her children as cogs in her 
household machine rather than people in and of their own right.  I 
see JKR milking Molly for comedy.  I don't see her giving Molly any 
sort of depth.

> >>Jeremiah:
> I really hate the notion that keeping house is a negative skill. 
> <snip>

Betsy Hp:
I tend to think JKR disagrees with you there.  Of course I really, 
really dislike Molly.  A lot.  But even through my admittedly tainted 
view, doesn't JKR tend to have Molly's housekeeping worries seem a 
bit... trivial, silly even?  Like when Harry's heading off to his 
trial in OotP and Molly decides to try and tame Harry's hair.  It 
annoys and discomforts Harry and seems to illustrate Molly's complete 
lack of helpfulness in a stressful situation.  Rather than being a 
calming influence, Molly is best at stirring everyone up.  When they 
least need it. 

It just seems to me that at best JKR means for Molly to be a comedic 
character, rather than a bastion of the purpose or strength of 
motherhood.  And as a comedic character, Molly is necessarily flat.

> >>Jeremiah: 
> Bellatrix. What would cause someone to go and be a DE? As a woman, 
> what would it take?
> <snip>

Betsy Hp:
Again, I see more stereotyping here rather than complexity.  
Bellatrix is a weaker version of Lady Macbeth, anything for the cause 
but without children of her own to sacrifice, all speech but no sleep 
walking aftermath. She's hot for Lord Voldemort and it seems to end 
pretty much there.  I just don't see the complexity.

I think your questions point to a *possible* complexity, but not one 
JKR has seemed interested in exploring.  

> >>Jeremiah:
> And Umbridge... She is career-motivated. She has a very dark and   
> sinister side to her.
> <snip>

Betsy Hp:
But, but!  Umbridge doesn't have any *other* side!  She's dark and 
sinister, and that's about it.  I mean, she's a great villain (as is 
Bellatrix for that matter).  Absolutely wonderful to hiss at as she 
stalks across the stage twirling her mustache, but we don't have any 
hints of deeper things going on.

Which, honestly I don't think JKR *has* to bring to the table.  But 
it does mean that neither Umbridge or Bellatrix bring the same depth 
to the bad guys that Barty Crouch, Jr. with his daddy-issues does.

Though... Perhaps Narcissa fufills this role.  She's no white-hat by 
any means.  But she does love her son (and husband apparently), so 
that does put her at Barty, Jr. level, I think.

> >>Jeremiah:
> Hermione is extremely complex.

Betsy Hp:
Agreed.  Though, not an adult, so this doesn't really fit into 
Julie's quest for a complex adult female character. <g>

> >>Jeremiah:
> Ginny is very complicated.
> <snip>

Betsy Hp:
Only if there's something up with her in HBP.  Otherwise she's 
Harry's sugar and a bit of recess before his battle with the big 
bad.  Oh, and his baby-making machine for the wonderful epilogue. <g>

However, if it turns out that her utterly horrid behavior in HBP 
really *was* horrid behavior and not short-hand for "spunky girl!" 
than yes, I'll grant you Ginny's complexity.  At this point though, 
it's still an open question.  And Ginny is still not an adult. <eg>

Betsy Hp